Ratings64
Average rating3.9
"A case against religion and a description of the ways in which religion is man-made"--Provided by the publisher.
Reviews with the most likes.
A bit too unphilosophical & journalistic (e.g. I can't get over the feeling that Hitchens was writing the book with the tv and the news on: this version of reality, however official it may be, is not relevant for me). I prefer Michel Onfray's version of Nietzschean atheism and I wonder why there are so few philosophers in the atheist controversion: it's almost like the theologians and scientists (more exactly authors writing either for God or for science) do all the talking. Still Hitchens is a wonderful rhetorician and a master of argumentative discourse and as an atheist, I had much to learn from him. And to paraphrase a recent article by Lesley Chamberlain on Nietzsche from the Guardian (07.02.2012 – http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2012/feb/07/political-message-nietzsche-god-is-dead?fb=native&CMP=FBCNETTXT9038): we should distrust the God of Reason and with him, all the Enlightenment. We need a deeper, more complex (even more ambiguous) atheism!
I rate this book highly mostly because I agree with it. Religion has done far more harm than good, and it's all based on nothing. That about sums up the book, but Hitchens manages to be pretty bitchy about it along the way, and his condescension isn't going to win him any friends. As an athiest who appreciates the teachings of Buddha, I also thought his dismissive attitude toward Buddhism (which in its purest form shouldn't be regarded as a religion) was rash and probably done to strengthen his hypothesis. It wouldn't do to have exceptions to the rule. If you don't want to read the whole thing, I recommend highly the last chapter: The Need for a New Enlightenment.